| Author |
Message |
| Registered: April 3, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 1,998 |
| | Posted: | | | | Get ride of the media companies Fields and just have six Studio fields and change the rule to state that the DVD distributor should be the last one entered after the studios from the films credits |
|
  | T!M | | Profiling since Dec. 2000 |
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 8,722 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting ninehours: Quote:
Get ride of the media companies Fields Yes, please. "Media companies" was a bad idea right from the start since the term apparently can't be properly defined - let alone that there's any chance that we'll ever get consistency on the order in which to list them. I simply do not understand how we can have a contributable field without properly defining what we should put in it, and in what order. If those problems can't be solved, the field has no business being part of the online profile. I would like to keep the remaining distributor field separately, not lumped together with the film's theatrical release studio and it's production companies. | | | | Last edited: by T!M |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,372 |
| | Posted: | | | | I voted 'other' since to me it doesn't matter if it stays or goes. If it stays though exactly what goes there obviously needs to be clarified by Invelos. |
|
| Registered: December 10, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,004 |
| | Posted: | | | | I just want publisher (i.e. company responsible for the software) tracked. This actually is useful data, or at least theoretically woudl be if we tracked it in a sensible manner. Maybe we need credited-as for studios so we know that Universal Home Video and Universal Home Entertainment are the same thing. |
|
| Registered: March 20, 2007 | Reputation:  |  Posts: 2,850 |
| | Posted: | | | | I don't want the producer/distributor of the film mixed up with the producer/distributor of the DVD, so I vote to keep them seperate.
If we can't properly define "Media Company" then let's drop it and stick strictly to film producers/distributors (i.e. no "Criterion", "Kino", WHV, TCFHV, etc.). |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Ace_of_Sevens: Quote:
I just want publisher (i.e. company responsible for the software) tracked. This actually is useful data, or at least theoretically woudl be if we tracked it in a sensible manner. Maybe we need credited-as for studios so we know that Universal Home Video and Universal Home Entertainment are the same thing. Who is publisher. These are DVD and BDs not books. The alternative could be to make the extra fields PERSONAL, that way the users that want it can create their own definition for themsleves, seems a logical choice since a useful definition has never been able to be created for ALL. But I would oprefer to see them moved into production. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: December 10, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,004 |
| | Posted: | | | | From the dictionary: Quote:
Definition 1: a person or company whose business is the publishing of books, periodicals, engravings, computer software, etc.
DVDs are a form of software. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 3,480 |
| | Posted: | | | | I do not want to mix film companies with DVD companies again. I also do not want to have to track this data on my own as a non-contributable field. What a slap to everyone who's been contributing this data for a year and a half. If you want them in a different order or want to leave some out, do so locally. But don't take the data away from the rest of us that was contributed in good faith just to please your sense of correctness. | | | ...James
"People fake a lot of human interactions, but I feel like I fake them all, and I fake them very well. That’s my burden, I guess." ~ Dexter Morgan |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 17,330 |
| | Posted: | | | | I put "Other" as I wouldn't mind 2 of the 3 going to Studios to allow for more. But I would want 1 for the MC so it is always listed... and the rules made to understand exactly what we are looking for.
But over-all just a better rule and I would be happy. | | | | Pete |
|
| Registered: June 12, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,665 |
| | Posted: | | | | Wouldn't miss the field at all. It has turned to useless garbage. | | | | Bad movie? You're soaking in it! |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 736 |
| | Posted: | | | | Hell no. I want the media fields so I can keep track of DVD companies and distributors. I would rather expand the studios' field. I've seen films with as many as 10 production companies and we can unfortunately capture only 3. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting m.cellophane: Quote:
I do not want to mix film companies with DVD companies again. I also do not want to have to track this data on my own as a non-contributable field. What a slap to everyone who's been contributing this data for a year and a half. If you want them in a different order or want to leave some out, do so locally. But don't take the data away from the rest of us that was contributed in good faith just to please your sense of correctness. A slap to everyone, the slap is to everyone that understands that there is no clear definition and one canot be achieved and so what we have is GIGO...BIG TIME garbage. If a clear definition could be achieved then we would not be having this discussion after almost TWO years. As noted Ken has fallen for this all too often, even making a ridiculous edit to the Rules now that has very nasty ramifications, but one user suggested it without considering the ramification and Kern bought it AGAIN. So there will be more combat and more stupid data. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Reputation: | | Posts: 2,372 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting Prof. Kingsfield: Quote:
Who is publisher. These are DVD and BDs not books. Join the 21st century will ya?  Computer Desktop Encyclopedia: publish Quote:
To disseminate information in a print or electronic format. After the final layout has been composed, print publishing involves printing the paper and binding the sheets into pamphlets or books. CD and DVD publishing requires converting final files to a master optical disc, which is converted to a metal master for pressing plastic media. Web publishing is all electronic. Final files are transmitted to the Web server or application server. Publishing is no longer just for something on paper. |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Quoting synner_man: Quote:
Hell no. I want the media fields so I can keep track of DVD companies and distributors. I would rather expand the studios' field. I've seen films with as many as 10 production companies and we can unfortunately capture only 3. Synner: Then i ask you as one of the more rational users, how do we decide what the data is and is not. My point is that a cohesive definition cannot be achieved,therefore at the very best, if these fields are left they need to be local where each user can make his own choices and his own definitions for his /her own consistency. I ceratainly see no way to resolve this for the Online as long as users persist in rather arcane and bizzare definitions which make no sense. Skip | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|
| Registered: March 13, 2007 | | Posts: 21,610 |
| | Posted: | | | | Rick: I refuse to comment on you utterly useless and insulting remark. You who admiits that this is all greek to you. That you don't know as much as many others. Skip  | | | ASSUME NOTHING!!!!!!
CBE, MBE, MoA and proud of it.
Outta here
Billy Video |
|